Judge expedites requests for legal basis of Trump Syria strikes

A judge has ruled that a watchdog group is entitled to quick answers to queries seeking the legal justification for the flurry of missile strikes President Donald Trump launched against Syria in April.

U.S. District Court Judge Christopher Cooper ordered three federal agencies — the State Department, the Defense Department and the Justice Department — to expedite their responses to Freedom of Information Act requests the Protect Democracy Project filed the day after the attacks.

Cooper turned down the liberal group’s request to force the agencies to respond by a specific date and he has not yet ruled on whether the agencies may be able to withhold some or all of the records of legal advice related to the strikes, which Trump ordered in response to alleged Syrian use of chemical weapons against civilians.

However, the judge said the organization had shown a “compelling need” to jump ahead of those seeking information on other matters, in part because there are signs Trump might strike Syria again in the near future.

“If production is unduly delayed, both Protect Democracy and the public at large will be ‘precluded … from obtaining in a timely fashion information vital to the current and ongoing debate surrounding the legality of’ a high-profile government action … namely, military strikes against the Syrian government. Being closed off from such a debate is itself a harm in an open democracy,” Cooper wrote in a 14-page opinion released Thursday afternoon. “But there is another potential harm, too: The possibility for the strikes to recur without legal justification. By then, any damage will have been done.”

The judge noted U.S. strikes against Syrian regime supporters in the country in May and June, as well as a statement the White House issued on June 26 threatening serious repercussions if Syria carries out another chemical attack.

“The recent escalation in hostilities between U.S. and Syria, plus indications from the White House that another chemical weapons attack may be in the offing, make it more likely that irreparable harm will result without expedited processing of Protect Democracy’s requests,” added Cooper, an appointee of President Barack Obama.

It’s unclear how much legal vetting Trump administration officials did of the April 6 strikes before the president ordered them. Spokespeople at various government agencies seemed to initially have little guidance on how the administration was justifying the strikes under U.S. law and under international law.

Eventually, the White House issued a statement saying that the Constitution gave the president the right to act in the situation and suggesting that prior presidents had carried out similar actions without Congressional approval. However, the legal basis for the attack under international law remained murky, since there was no blessing of the action by an international body like the United Nations or NATO and it appeared there was no imminent threat to the U.S.

Prior to Cooper’s ruling, the Justice Department had already agreed to expedite the liberal group’s FOIA requests, although State and Defense had not and government lawyers urged Cooper not to make them do so.

While the judge declined to set a specific deadline for the release of the legal records, he told the agencies involved they must report back to him by July 28 with an estimate of how much information is covered by the request and a proposal of when the records could be processed for release.

“This ruling reinforces a core principle of our democracy at a critical time: the President does not have a blank check to fire missiles whenever he wants at whomever he wants,” Murphy said.

“While the Assad regime has committed horrible abuses, President Trump is constrained by the law and owes the American people an explanation of his legal authority for ordering these strikes — and for any new military strikes going forward. This decision is a critical defense of Americans’ right to be a check on the executive, as an informed citizenry on one of the most consequential decisions our government can make, the decision to start a war,” she added.

frank

Sure Assad with everyone against him would order chemical strikes so he can have more enemies. Nonsense he did not use chemicals but whomever would benefit from framing him (rebels, Israel, Turkey etc) conducted the attacks through their proxies.